Governance -- the way in which decisions that affect the public interest are made -- has emerged as a key factor in determining a country's pace of development. Successful governance brings purposeful change. Failure is punished by unrest, disaffection, and stagnation. Tomorrow, a conference in Bangkok will dissect the prospects for improved governance in Asia.
Today's Asian policymakers confront a very different environment from that faced by their predecessors 50 years ago. Asia's population has more than doubled since 1950, with most of that growth coming in its poorest countries. The political systems of these countries were tailored to small, static, rural populations. Now these societies must cope not only with vast urban centers, but also with the very different talents and demands of urbanized people.
The global economy has changed dramatically, too. Increased flows of goods, money and knowledge around the world mean that foreign organizations and individuals become more influential, making it increasingly difficult for national governments manage their countries by themselves. For example, international bodies such as the WTO have changed the framework within which economic decisions are taken.
A "back to basics" approach is vital in three inter-linked areas, in which national governments must take the lead: minimizing corruption, enforcing property rights and consistent application of the rule of law. Few countries score strongly here.
Close links between business and governments were blamed by many for the financial crisis that struck Southeast Asia in 1997. In parts of South Asia, violent conflict and the power of vested interests threaten the rule of law. The result of such failures is that small elites benefit while the majority suffers.
A clear structure of formal rules is the best antidote to these flaws, for they bolster the informal customs on which so much in society depends. Most business is not conducted in courts but in meetings where trust and reputation are essential.
As the social theorist Robert Putnam has explained, "social capital" -- the networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate cooperation and coordination for mutual benefit -- is as much a determinant as it is a result of economic growth.
Empowering as many members citizens as possible is likely to instill a widespread sense of purpose into efforts to move countries forward. Government, the private sector and civil society all have a role to play in strengthening social capital. But successful interactions between these sectors cannot be wished into existence and it is essential that the role of each is clearly defined.
But governments retain a role in fostering an enabling environment within which markets operate. Monitoring rules and enforcement are important, but different ways of working -- say, through public-private partnerships -- are also increasingly being considered in many innovative Asian economies.
The valuable role of civil society in giving voice to communities that governments cannot reach is also recognized, but its relationship with government and business is often characterized more by conflict than cooperation.
The private sector's role in decision-making, too, often needs to be clarified -- where businesses have too much influence over government, their need to operate profitable may lead to policies that favor the few over the many.
The metaphor of a game -- with rules and participants -- leads many to think in terms of a competition between nations. This is not entirely healthy, as our interdependent world is not a zero-sum game, where one country's gain is another's loss. Indeed, countries do not compete against each other in the way that firms do.
Trade is potentially a positive-sum game, with all countries benefiting by exploiting their areas of comparative advantage. Good governance can enhance this positive-sum game, and ensure that companies and individuals within countries partake of the benefits.
In another sense, however, it is valuable to think of governments as being in competition -- providing a more effective service to their people than other governments. International comparison of systems therefore plays an important role.
In this spirit, this month's joint conference with the UN Conference on Trade and Development along with the UN Development Program -- "Governance in Asia: Underpinning Competitiveness in a Global Economy" -- will bring together policymakers from across Asia to discuss the governance challenges that Asia faces.
The role of government -- the only actor possessing the legitimacy of a popular mandate -- is fundamentally important in steering a society forward.
The private sector and civil society are, of course, increasingly important partners for governments. How relationships among these stakeholders function will powerfully influence Asia's future development.
David Bloom is professor of economics and demography at Harvard University. David Steven is a policy/strategic consultant who founded the UK-based knowledge consultancy River Path Associates. Mark Weston researches and writes on policy issues for a variety of organizations.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
RSS